1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to the sport of wildfowl hunting, and more specifically to a decoy having wind activated vanes or simulated wings. The wings are supported by low friction bearings which enable them to turn in extremely light breezes to simulate the appearance of the wing motion of a waterfowl (duck, goose, etc.) alighting on a body of water. The decoy is further supported by a generally vertical post, which allows the decoy to swivel into the prevailing wind in order to provide greater realism and proper airflow over the wings.
2. Description of the Related Art
Decoys, lures and the like have been used by hunters to attract game from the beginnings of the activity. Hunters have recognized that relatively crude decoys and the like are not particularly effective, but have employed such crude decoys as being better than nothing. More recently, relatively sophisticated decoys using audioanimatronic principles have been developed, with such decoys serving to attract and fool game animals to a much greater extent than earlier, relatively simple decoys and lures.
However, such relatively sophisticated decoys, with their electrically operated components, tend to be relatively fragile, particularly in the outdoor environment where they are subject to temperature extremes, moisture, etc. Such complex decoys are also relatively expensive to purchase initially, as well as to maintain. As a result, they have never found great favor among hunters and others who wish to use decoys to attract game animals.
Nonetheless, the provision of a decoy which employs some periodic movement, is desirable. Most animals are attuned to detect movement before detecting most other visual cues (color, contrast, etc.). While some aspects of movement may startle the game animals away, a movement which is relatively natural in its appearance is desirable, particularly if the movement can be achieved without complex and costly electromechanical mechanisms.
Accordingly, a need will be seen for a decoy employing simulated wings deployed laterally from the body of the device. The simulated wings extend laterally on rotary shafts or spars, which are in turn mounted through the decoy body on roller or ball bearings to provide an extremely low friction attachment. The slightest breeze causes the two wings and their rotationally mounted spars to rotate in their bearings through the body, with the result having an appearance from some distance away much like the wing beat of a bird alighting. The body of the decoy is mounted in a similar manner upon a generally vertical post, which allows the decoy to pivot to face into the wind in a realistic manner while also providing more efficient airflow to the wings.
A discussion of the related art of which the present inventors are aware, and its differences and distinctions from the present invention, is provided below.
U.S. Pat. No. 547,553 issued on Oct. 8, 1895 to Arthur H. Keller, titled xe2x80x9cToy,xe2x80x9d describes a simulated bird having a wing flapping mechanism powered by a ratchet mechanism, which is in turn powered by a cord as it is unwound from a wheel within the device. The toy bird is mounted on a line which extends at an angle downwardly between two points, with the weight of the toy causing the first line to unwind to cause the wing mechanism to flap. The Keller device is not powered by the wind, and cannot operate when the body of the device is at rest upon a level surface.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,441,753 issued on May 18, 1948 to Gurdeon E. Carpenter, titled xe2x80x9cDuck Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a silhouette or profile type decoy formed of a single relatively thin sheet of plywood or other suitable material. The decoy shape and markings generally present the appearance of a bird viewed from above, with wings outspread. The entire apparatus is pivotally balanced upon a stake which is in turn driven into the underlying surface to support the decoy and allow it to pivot into the wind. Movement of the decoy about its pivot simulates a gliding bird with outspread wings. However, the Carpenter decoy is a single monolithic unit with no relatively movable wings, whereas the present decoy with its wind activated rotary vanes serves to simulate the wing beat of an alighting bird, which cannot be accomplished with the fixed wings of the Carpenter decoy.
U.S. Pat. No. 2,638,705 issued on May 19, 1953 to Albert W. Petrasy, titled xe2x80x9cOrnamental Bird Having Rotatable Wings,xe2x80x9d describes a simulated bird having a profile body with a short wing support shaft rotatably installed laterally through the body. A wing attachment arm is affixed to each end of the lateral shaft, with a wing panel extending from each attachment arm. The wing panels are each twisted, so as to provide a pitch angle or angle of attack when presented to the wind. The resulting apparatus is related to a propeller, but with the blade attachments being longitudinally offset from one another on the propeller shaft, rather than being in the same plane. The apparatus thus does not resemble the present decoy with its rotary wing panels having their elongate axes disposed along a single lateral axis.
U.S. Pat. No. 3,707,798 issued on Jan. 2, 1973 to Ned A. Tryon, titled xe2x80x9cDecoy,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy formed of a pair of flat elements assembled in a cruciform configuration. The vertically disposed element resembles a silhouette of a goose body, while the horizontally disposed element represents the width of the body when viewed from above. The assembly is mounted atop a stake which is driven into the underlying surface to support the decoy. No relatively movable components are provided by Tryon for his decoy. No movable wing panels or pivoted mounting are provided by Tryon, in contrast to the pivoted mounting and rotating wing panels of the present wind activated decoy.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,620,385 issued on Nov. 4, 1986 to Thomas G. Carranza et al., titled xe2x80x9cRotatable Wings For Water Fowl Decoys,xe2x80x9d describes a simulated wing assembly in which each wing comprises four rotary vanes extending from a common lateral shaft. The shaft is immovably affixed to the mounting harness, with the wing vane assemblies extending from tubes which in turn rotate independently relative to one another upon the shaft. In contrast, the present wind activated decoy attaches the wings to a single common shaft, with the shaft rotating within low friction bearings disposed within a lateral passage through the decoy silhouette. A major advantage of the present decoy in comparison to the Carranza et al. decoy, is that the opposite wings of the present decoy have a fixed relationship with their planes disposed at a fixed angle of forty five degrees from one another. This relationship assures that the wings will always have a synchronous relationship, just as the wings of a real waterfowl would likely have as the bird flapped its wings while alighting, and also precludes any singularity where air pressure on the wings equalizes to preclude rotation. The planform of the wings of the present decoy is also more realistic than the rectangular planform of the wings of the Carranza et al. decoy. Moreover, the Carranza et al. decoy requires a relatively thick body in order to support the wing attachment harness or frame, thus adding to the cost of the apparatus. The present wind activated decoy utilizes a silhouette or profile body, which greatly reduces the cost of the decoy while reducing realism only slightly when viewed from an oblique angle at some distance away.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,651,457 issued on Mar. 24, 1987 to Robert D. Nelson et al., titled xe2x80x9cDecoy,xe2x80x9d describes a silhouette head and neck portion with a pneumatically inflatable body portion extending therefrom. The head and neck portion is pivotally attached to a stake to allow the assembly to rotate in a breeze. However, the Nelson et al. decoy has no relatively movable wing panels to simulate the flight motion of a real bird, as does the present wind activated decoy. The Nelson et al. decoy only simulates a bird which is feeding, rather than one which is in flight and alighting on the surface, as in the case of the present wind activated decoy.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,656,768 issued on Apr. 14, 1987 to James C. Thigpen, titled xe2x80x9cWind Driven Sign,xe2x80x9d describes a character having a silhouette body with opposed wind driven arms each affixed to its own independent lateral shaft. The general configuration is more closely related to that of the decoy of the Petrasy ""705 U.S. Patent, discussed further above, than to the present invention. No lateral vanes are provided by Thigpen to simulate horizontally spread wing panels, in contrast to the present wind activated decoy invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,003,722 issued on Apr. 2, 1991 to Robert D. Berkley et al., titled xe2x80x9cFlying Game Bird Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy having a flat planform formed of thin sheets of foam plastic material mounted on a stake. The flexible sheet foam material allows the wing panels to move to simulate flight. However, no rotary motion is provided for the wing panels, nor is any realistic appearance provided from the side, due to the flat sheet elements.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,144,764 issued on Sep. 8, 1992 to Timothy D. Peterson, titled xe2x80x9cDecoy With Wind-Actuated Wings,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy formed almost entirely of flexible materials. The body portion comprises a hollow fabric tube, serving as a wind sock. The wing panels are activated by the wind to flap in a breeze, simulating a flying bird. However, no rotary motion of the wing panels is provided by Peterson, in contrast to the present decoy. The wing panels of the Peterson decoy are formed of thin, flexible sheet elements with wire or other stiffening rods. The rods hold the wings outspread, while allowing them to flap upwardly and downwardly in a wind. The inflatable body portion and flexible wing elements of the Peterson decoy are unlike the present decoy.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,283,088 issued on Feb. 1, 1994 to Dorothy H. Alcorn, titled xe2x80x9cBird Figure,xe2x80x9d describes a simulated hummingbird having a profile body and laterally disposed rotating wings. Each wing panel is formed of a single, generally star-shaped element folded to provide a series of six wing panels extending radially from a lateral axis. Alcorn states that the wing panels rotate in a breeze, but she does not provide any aerodynamic curvature to generate any aerodynamic forces upon the panels. In contrast, the present wind activated decoy includes relatively easily fabricated rotary wings, each formed of a single panel having a sinusoidal cross sectional shape to generate aerodynamic forces for rotation. Moreover, Alcorn suspends her hummingbird model from a string, which is impracticable for a decoy used in the field.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,682,702 issued on Nov. 4, 1997 to Craig T. McKnight et al., titled xe2x80x9cCollapsible Bird Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a structure formed of a series of relatively thin, flat panels secured orthogonally together to provide an assembly having a somewhat three dimensional appearance. The wing panels are flexible in order to flap in a breeze, and the assembly is pivotally mounted atop a stake in order to align itself with the breeze. No rotary motion is provided for the wing panels. The resulting structure is thus more closely related to the decoys of the Berkley et al. ""722 and Peterson ""764 U.S. Patents, than to the present wind activated decoy invention.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,862,619 issued on Jan. 26, 1999 to Jeffrey T. Stancil, titled xe2x80x9cAnimated Water Fowl Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy having a three dimensional body with a frame disposed thereabove. A laterally disposed rotary wing shaft extends across the frame, with a single rotary wing installed on the shaft. The Stancil decoy is in some respects relatively more costly and complex than the present decoy, in that Stancil provides a three dimensional body for his decoy. Yet, the wing provided for the Stancil decoy is relatively primitive and unrealistic, with its frame mounted above the decoy body and single, laterally continuous span supported by each wing tip. In contrast, the present decoy wings provide considerably greater realism, with their individual spans extending to each side of the decoy body.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,092,323 issued on Jul. 25, 2000 to Craig M. McBride et al., titled xe2x80x9cDuck Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy with a rotary wing assembly extending to each side thereof. The decoy body is three dimensional and is supported by a central stake, with the outboard ends of the wing panels supported by lateral extensions of the stake. The McBride et al. wing assembly is not a cantilever structure with unsupported outer tips, as is the present decoy wing with its more realistic cantilever structure. Moreover, McBride et al. do not provide any means for their decoy to pivot about the vertical axis of the mounting stake to allow their decoy to pivot into the wind, whereas the present decoy can pivot freely into the wind according to variation in the wind direction in order to orient the airflow properly to activate the wing action and for greater realism.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,170,188 issued on Jan. 9, 2001 to Robert F. Mathews, titled xe2x80x9cApparatus For Attracting Waterfowl,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy having a superficial resemblance to the present decoy. The Mathews decoy requires a three dimensional body, as the device contains a motor to provide power to the rotary wings. As Mathews prefers to provide power for wing rotation, he does not provide any means for his decoy to pivot into the wind, as is evidenced by its attachment to a series of square section tubes which cannot rotate relative to one another. Moreover, such motorized decoy mechanisms are not universally legal for hunting, whereas the present wind activated decoy mechanism is legal and is considerably less costly to purchase and maintain than such motorized decoy mechanisms.
Canadian Patent Publication No. 1,050,268 issued on Mar. 13, 1979 to Marvin Snow, titled xe2x80x9cWater Fowl Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a decoy having a folding and flapping wing mechanism which may be remotely actuated by lines or cords. The wings of the Snow decoy are rigid panels, pivotally hinged to each side of the decoy body. The wings do not rotate about a lateral or any other axis extending from the body, as do the rotating wings of the present decoy. Moreover, the wings of the Snow decoy must be actuated manually. They do not operate automatically due to airflow from a wind or breeze, as is the case with the present wind actuated decoy.
Canadian Patent Publication No. 2,052,585 published on Apr. 3, 1992 to Bruce R. Balmer, titled xe2x80x9cWing Attachment For Bird Decoys,xe2x80x9d describes a wing attachment formed of an extremely thin and lightweight flexible plastic sheet or other suitable material. Wire stays or spars may be installed with the sheets to spread the wings as desired. While the Balmer wings will tend to flutter in a breeze, they do not rotate or provide significant movement to simulate the flapping of a bird alighting upon a surface, as do the present wind activated decoy wings.
Finally, Canadian Patent Publication No. 2,177,498 published on Nov. 29, 1997 to Philippe Dupuis, titled xe2x80x9cHunting Decoy,xe2x80x9d describes a flat panel decoy closely resembling that of the ""798 U.S. Patent to Tryon, discussed further above. As in the Tryon decoy, the Dupuis decoy does not provide any wing movement.
None of the above inventions and patents, either singly or in combination, is seen to describe the instant invention as claimed.
The present wind activated decoy essentially comprises a profile or silhouette decoy body with a lateral passage therethrough, for removably supporting a rotary shaft therein on bearings. The shaft includes a first permanently installed wing panel and a second removable wing panel, allowing the second panel to be removed from the shaft for removal of the shaft from the decoy body passage for compact storage of the components. Each wing panel comprises a thin, rigid sheet of material having a sinusoidal cross section in order to catch the wind and rotate or spin in a slight breeze. The two wing panels are secured upon the shaft with their chords at about a forty five degree angle to one another, in order to avoid any singularity where aerodynamic pressures are equalized and which would preclude rotation of the wing panels.
The present decoy includes a support shaft depending therefrom, which is removably inserted into a tube (pipe or conduit, etc.) which is in turn driven into the underlying surface (pond bottom, marsh, etc.). The support shaft is located somewhat forwardly of the lateral aerodynamic center of pressure of the decoy, thereby causing the decoy to pivot about the support shaft to face the prevailing breeze. This provides the proper orientation of the decoy for actuation of the rotary wing vanes, as well as producing greater realism to simulate real birds which face into the prevailing breeze or wind.
When a breeze is present, the rotary wing panels or vanes are rotated by the breeze. Preferably, the opposite surfaces of each panel are painted to resemble the upper and lower wing surfaces of a waterfowl (duck, goose, etc., depending upon the type of bird being simulated). As the wing panels rotate, they simulate the appearance of the rapid flapping of the wings of a bird alighting upon a surface. The present decoy thus provides a realistic appearance and action, while also being economical and easily deployed and removed in the field as desired.
Accordingly, it is a principal object of the invention to provide a wind activated decoy having a silhouette body with a rotary wing panel or vane extending to each side thereof.
It is another object of the invention to provide opposite first and second wing panels disposed upon a single common shaft or spar, with one of the panels being removable from the spar and the spar being removably installable in bearing supports within the silhouette body of the decoy.
It is a further object of the invention to provide a decoy in which the wing panels or vanes each comprise a thin, rigid sheet of material having a sinusoidal cross sectional shape to catch the wind to produce rotation of the panels in a breeze.
Still another object of the invention is to provide a wind activated decoy having the chords of the two rotary wing vanes angularly offset from one another, in order to avoid a singularity with equalized aerodynamic pressures which would preclude rotation at certain predetermined rotational angles.
It is an object of the invention to provide improved elements and arrangements thereof for the purposes described which is inexpensive, dependable and fully effective in accomplishing its intended purposes.